Daily Yellowstone journal. [volume] (Miles City, Mont.) 1882-1893, 1887-06-12
JUDICIAL DECISION.
Given at Length by Judge Bach
in a Yellowstone County
Test Case.
The Old Reliable Chicago &
Northwestern Heading for
Miles City.
COUNTY INDEBTEDNESS.

.~'AA A-NDLDAEDNE>ss
Decision by Judge Bach In Test Case.
james NJ. Harris, sheriff, vs.. County
Commissioners Yellowstone County
This is an application by the sheriff
of Yellowstone county for a manda
mus compelling the county commits
sioners of Yellowstone county 10 issu,
TO him a warrant for his salary, fol
the quarter ending May 3lst, 1887.
The petition shows that the lega
formalities as to the presentation ant
allowance Of his account have all beer
complied with, and that after audit
ing and allowing the said account the
county commissioners refused to issu,
to the sheriff warrant for that ac
count.
In answer to the petition, the coun
ty commissioners state that the pres
ent Indebtedness of Yellowstone coun
ty Is In excess Of the 4 per cent. limi
tation Of the assessed valuation, to the
extent Of about $1,000. The petition i,
for warrant generally.
The act Of Congress, found On page
l70-l, Of the laws of the United States
Of 1856, declares THAT no political Of
municipal corporation, county, ol
other subdivision in any Of the ter
rltories Of the United States shall
ever become indebted 10 any manner
or for any purpose to any amount In
the aggregate, including existing in
pebtedness, exceeding per centum OF
the value Of the taxable property with
In such corporation, county or sub-di
vision, to be ascertained by the las
assessment for territorial and county
taxes previous to the incurring Of suct
Indebtedness"
The language used in that act is. In
my opinion, 80 comprehensive that il
includes all manner of Indebtedness
whether for current expenses, neces
cary expenses, or for improvements
and do not feel at liberty tolimit tn,
act of Congress in any way 30 tha
there snail be excluded from its provi
sions ann debt whatsoever, ever
though thXt debt be for the curren
expenses Of the said county.
Counsel for the petitioner has calle'
the attention of the court to the case
In ihe ILLINOIS supreme court.
Fuller vs., Heath. SO Ills, 296.
Ida Irene Law et al vs.. The People
81 Ills, 3S5.
do not think that those cases ar
In point. The warrant asked for her
is a general warrant-the warrant o
the Indebtedness which was the sub
ject of Judicial investigation in thos
cases, was o warrant which appropri
ated portion of a tax already levied
though not collected. That was helt
to raise no Indebtedness against th'
county, for the reason that the war
rant was payable out Of sum certain
and, according to the rules OF law wei
ascertained in that respect, If that sun
had not been realized. the county coult
not be held upon those warrants, ant
the warrants merely acted as an as
signment of SO much of those take
levied aud to be collected. This cas
does not raise similar point. If tn
county commissioners of Yellowston
county had issued q warrant directing
the treasurer Of Yellowstone county ;
pay a person mentioned In that wal
rant, or to bearer, q certain specified
sum, payment to be made by th
treasurer when the taxes already levi
ed should have been collected ant
placed in his official control, and II
taxpayer sought to enjoin the issuanc
of such warrant or the payment
1t, then the questions decided in tn
cases referred to would be directly In
volvsd; and II would seem from th
current ofsuthorities that the injunt
ton would have to be denied, for sue
warrants, II would seem, do not Great
an Indebtedness against the count
contrary to the law, although the lin
It of Indebtedness may have bee
heretofore already reached.
The writ Is denied.
THOMAS c. BACH, Judg
| natad Iuna = 1907